Yao Francis Y, Ferrell Linda, Bass Nathan M, Bacchetti Peter, Ascher Nancy L, Roberts John P
Division of Gastroenterology, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, CA 94143-0538, USA.
Liver Transpl. 2002 Sep;8(9):765-74. doi: 10.1053/jlts.2002.34892.
We previously proposed modified staging criteria for predicting acceptable outcome after orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). These were solitary tumor < or = 6.5 cm, or three or fewer nodules with the largest lesion < or = 4.5 cm and total tumor diameter < or = 8 cm, without gross vascular invasion (University of California, San Francisco [UCSF] criteria). In this study, we further evaluated the performance of the Milan criteria (solitary tumor < or = 5 cm, or three or fewer lesions none > 3 cm), the UCSF criteria, and the Pittsburgh modified tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) criteria. Pathologic HCC staging according to each set of criteria was performed in 70 patients. The difference in survival when comparing 24 patients with HCC exceeding Milan criteria versus 46 patients meeting Milan criteria did not reach statistical significance (HR, 2.0; P = .12). Using our definition for acceptable 2-year survival to be > or = 70%, the 14 patients (20%) meeting UCSF criteria but exceeding Milan criteria had a 2-year survival of 86% (95% CI, 54% to 96%). Survival for Pittsburgh stage I, II, and IIIA patients as a group was significantly better than for stages IIIB and IVA patients combined (HR, 4.2; P = .007), and similar to survival for patients meeting UCSF criteria. Advanced tumor exceeding UCSF criteria served reasonably well as a surrogate marker for poorly differentiated grade and microvascular invasion. In conclusion, our analyses suggest that UCSF criteria better predict acceptable posttransplant outcome than Milan criteria. UCSF criteria confer a different advantage over Pittsburgh criteria, which require information on microvascular invasion that is difficult to ascertain preoperatively without the attendant risk of biopsy.
我们之前提出了改良分期标准,用于预测肝细胞癌(HCC)原位肝移植(OLT)术后的可接受结局。这些标准为单个肿瘤≤6.5 cm,或三个及以下结节,最大病灶≤4.5 cm且肿瘤总直径≤8 cm,无肉眼可见血管侵犯(加利福尼亚大学旧金山分校[UCSF]标准)。在本研究中,我们进一步评估了米兰标准(单个肿瘤≤5 cm,或三个及以下病灶,均不大于3 cm)、UCSF标准以及匹兹堡改良肿瘤-淋巴结-转移(TNM)标准的性能。根据每组标准对70例患者进行了病理HCC分期。比较24例HCC超过米兰标准的患者与46例符合米兰标准的患者,其生存差异未达到统计学意义(HR,2.0;P = 0.12)。按照我们对可接受的2年生存率≥70%的定义,14例(20%)符合UCSF标准但超过米兰标准的患者2年生存率为86%(95% CI,54%至96%)。匹兹堡I期、II期和IIIA期患者作为一个整体的生存率显著优于IIIB期和IVA期患者合并后的生存率(HR,4.2;P = 0.007),且与符合UCSF标准的患者生存率相似。超过UCSF标准的进展期肿瘤可较好地作为低分化分级和微血管侵犯的替代标志物。总之,我们的分析表明,UCSF标准比米兰标准能更好地预测移植后的可接受结局。与匹兹堡标准相比,UCSF标准具有不同的优势,匹兹堡标准需要微血管侵犯的信息,而术前若无活检带来的相关风险则难以确定。